Posted on 06/25/2008 7:58:32 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
It is now a certainty that the "birth certificate" claimed by the Barack Obama campaign as authentic is a photoshopped fake.
The image, purporting to come from the Hawaii Department of Health, has been the subject of intense skepticism in the blogosphere in the past two weeks. But now the senior spokesman of that Department has confirmed to Israel Insider what are the required features of a certified birth document -- features that Obama's purported "birth certificate" clearly lack.
The image became increasingly suspect with Israel Insider's revelation that variations of the certificate image were posted on the Photobucket image aggregation website -- including one listing the location of Obama's birth as Antarctica, one with the certificate supposedly issued by the government of North Korea, and another including a purported photo of baby Barack -- one of which has a "photo taken" time-stamp just two minutes before the article and accompanying image was posted on the left-wing Daily Kos blog.
That strongly suggests that Daily Kos obtained the image from Photobucket, not the State of Hawaii, the Obama family, or the Obama campaign. Photobucket is not generally known as a credible supplier of official vital records for any of the fifty states, and the liberties that other Photoshoppers took with the certificates confirms this.
Some of these oddities surfaced in Israel Insider's previous article on the subject, but new comparative documentary evidence presented below, and official verification obtained by Israel Insider from a senior Hawaiian official, provides the strongest confirmation yet.
An authentic Hawaiian birth certificate for another Hawaiian individual has since surfaced which, using the same official form as the presumptive Obama certificate, includes an embossed official seal and an authoritative signature, coming through from the back. Obama's alleged certificate lacks those features, and the certificate number referencing the birth year has been blacked out, making it untraceable.
Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document."
Compare the top image presented by his campaign as evidence of Obama's 1961 birth and the other certifying the birth of one Patricia Decosta.
http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg
http://www.valeehill.net/genealogy/documents/doc_decosta_pat_birth.jpg
So if he were registered as being born in Hawaii, Barack Obama -- because only he or another member of his immediate family could by law request a "Certification of Live Birth" -- must have a certified paper copy, with embossed stamp and seal, or he could request one. But what his campaign has put forward as genuine, according to the senior spokesman in the relevant department of the State of Hawaii, is not in fact a certified copy. It is not valid.
Whereas the uncertified Obama document provides the date "filed by registrar", the certified DeCosta document provides the date "accepted by the registrar." The difference between filing an application for a Certification of Live Birth and having it accepted may be key here.
The Obama campaign, however, continues to flaunt the unstamped, unsealed, uncertified document -- notably in very low resolution -- on its "Fight the Smears" website, with campaign officials vowing that it's authentic, sending the image around as "proof" to reporters, and inviting supporters to refer to it as they battle against supposed distortions and calumnies against their candidate. However, the campaign refuses to produce an authentic original birth certificate from the year of Obama's birth, or even a paper version with seal and signature of the "Certification of Live Birth." Nor has it even published an electronic copy with the requisite embossed seal and signature.
The failure of the Obama campaign to do so, and its willingness instead to put up an invalid, uncertified image -- what now appears to be a crude forgery -- raises the dramatic question of why the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate might have to hide.
Until now, it has been thought that there might be some embarrassing information on the real certificate: was the candidate's name something other than Barack Hussein Obama II, as it is claimed? Was no father listed because of the uncertainty over Obama's paternity? Was his father's race listed as Arab, or Muslim, rather than African? These revelations might be embarrassing, and further undermine his credibility, but he could disavow and downplay their significance. Would revealing such embarrassment outweigh the far greater risks involved in perpetuating a palpable forgery, or passing off an uncertified official document as being certified?
There is one possibility, however, which alone might justify the risk that Obama and his campaign seems to be taking in putting forward the uncertified document image: Obama was not in fact born in Hawaii and may not be an American citizen at all, or at least not a "natural born citizen" as the Constitution defines the requirement for the nation's chief executive. Real original birth certificates, circa 1961, have all kinds of verifiable information that would confirm Obama's origins, or throw them into doubt should they be lacking.
Research has since uncovered the law, in force at the time of Obama's birth, that were he to have been born in another country, his young American mother's youth extended time abroad would not suffice to make him a "natural born citizen." Even if he were naturalized later -- and there is no evidence that he was -- he would not be eligible to run for the office of president and -- if forgery or misrepresentation were involved -- he and his staffers might find themselves facing stiff federal and state charges.
But if, at this late date, Obama has no proof of being a US citizen by law, natural born or otherwise, then he or his advisers may be tempted to try to "tough out" the allegations about his "birth certificate" or the lack thereof. He and his campaign have gotten through other embarrassments: maybe this one will go away, too.
Because the consequences were he to admit, or should it come out, that he was not born in Hawaii would be so grave as to make it tempting to take the gamble and hope that no one dares call his most audacious bluff by demanding proof. Talk about the audacity of hope.
But now the State of Hawaii has dashed those hopes by clarifying that a certified birth certificate must have an embossed seal and signature, features his claimed birth certificate image lack.
The longer Obama waits, the graver grow the consequences of waiting.
There is one simple way for the candidate to clear up the issue once and for all: produce for public inspection and objective analysis the paper copy of his original Hawaiian birth certificate -- if one exists. If he's lost the original, he can request a certified copy. Ordinary citizens are required to produce one to get a passport or a driver's license. Surely it's not too much to ask from a man who aspires to hold the highest office in the land.
The issue is not whether Obama is black or white, Christian or Muslim. It is whether he was born in the USA and thus a citizen eligible according to the Constitution to run for President.
If proof of citizenship does not exist, then surely it would be wiser to admit it now.
Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of his "natural born" American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible criminality.
Congress would just amend the constitution to allow “exceptions”.
Sounds about right. Fine by me
So those Democrats in the Electoral College could all pick Harry Reid or the dog catcher in my county to be President
Please read my post #94, conservativegramma. That condition (g) isn’t expressed very felicitously, but I believe that I’ve interpreted it correctly. It is NOT correct to say that if Ann Dunham wasn’t in military or government service, then her offspring can’t be a natural-born citizen if he was born outside of the U.S. or its possessions.
Maybe so, but it still doesn’t answer why obama is trying to pass off a fake and invalid certficate as valid. I can’t say this enough: His ‘certificate’ does NOT have a raised seal on it.....read the article again. The State of Hawaii would NOT issue a certificate without one.
John IS a lawyer who's argued cases before the Supreme Court. You'll excuse me if I take his word over a newbie who's been here a whole 5 days.
As far as McCain making this an issue: Thanks for the laugh! McCain wouldn't challenge Obama if he was caught on tape murdering someone while robbing a bank with his 14 yo gay lover driving the get away car lest he be labled a racist.
Quote from site:
"A Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state -
NOTE: A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. Please note that some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes."
Note also from the State Department that you may obtain a passport with other certified documents, so Obama NOT having a U.S. certified birth certificate would NOT have prevented him from obtaining a passport.
But it does clearly show that a valid and certified birth certificate will have a raised seal on it.
Obama's does not - WHY???? (This question is for all of you who don't seem to think this is a huge issue.........)
I looked the argument over, and it looks plausible, if he really was not born in Hawaii afterall. On the other hand, I think the law has been changed since then, though I don’t have the time to research whether it would have retroactive application. Doesn’t seem like it should.
Somebody upthread posted that the ‘5 years after the age of 14’ requirement was changed to ‘2 years after the age of 14’ and retroactively applies to Obama. But, if the birth certificate is legit it’s a moot point.
It is interesting though that he won’t release the birth certificate. What’s he trying to hide?
I’ll have to get into the safe when I get home but I’m pretty sure I have a certified birth certificate from the great state of West Virginia that does not have a raised seal. I think it does have a multicolored one though.
Notice my link above to travel.state.gov....a multicolored seal qualifies as a valid and certified copy. Some counties do a raised, embossed or impressed seal, others do the multicolored.
Obama’s has NONE OF THE ABOVE, which proves his ‘copy’ is invalid at the very least, and certainly suspect as a complete fake.
Maybe so, but it still doesn’t answer why obama is trying to pass off a fake and invalid certficate as valid. I can’t say this enough: His ‘certificate’ does NOT have a raised seal on it.....read the article again. The State of Hawaii would NOT issue a certificate without one.
That may be so, but it's not the issue I was addressing. Here's how I ended my post #89:
Now this is all separate and apart from the issue whether the document posted on Obama's website is genuine or not. I don't know anything about that. I've addressed only the question of Obama's natural-born citizen status.
I probably should have posted to a different thread, but I was returning to the topic and this thread happened to be handy...
BTW--- Anyone can run. If Obama is a fraud he cannot serve as PresidentIt seems to me that, since the 'qualifications' to run for Prez of the U.S. are so minimal . . . native born and over 35 years of age . . . a valid birth certificate should be required to register with FEC to run for the office. I know it sounds dumb to ask this question . . . but, seriously, who will vet his qualifications, age and birth? If it really has to be up to John Q Publc, that is absolutely pitiful.
Run for president is different than serve as President
“Since his mother was an American, I don’t think it matters.
Now if you could show that his mother was really another woman, that might make a difference... Or maybe that his mother renounced her citizenship before he was born.””
Perhaps citizenship is not the issue, but rather name, religion, married or unmarried, etc.
Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the document."
Someone is lying here who is it?
Perhaps they are unable to post the real one because BHO refuses to publish it for whatever embarrassing reason.
Or it could be they are just trying to bait the opposition and then show the real one to try to embarrass them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.